king ubu Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 A world without Willie Smith? Hell no!!! Quote
JSngry Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 No sign of Sarah? Wordless lead vocal, right here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SAkQfERLjY Hardly her most greatest moment, and a lot of other people could have done it, but...once again, it's about branding. By the time this album came out, most everybody who knew who Sarah Vaughan really was and what she really did would not buy this album. I know I sure didn't. But - that record, and so many others, were not made for people like us. Now, how many of the people to whom this record were aimed rushed right back out and snatched up the entire Sarah Vaughan catalog is certainly up for debate but again, we're not looking at a "musical" ideal here nearly as much as were are a corporate one. Keep the name "Sarah Vaughan" in younger audiences minds, if not necessarily their ears, and you develop a "brand name" that can be used long after she's gone. Gotta say, this one thing didn't do it all by itself, but it didn't hurt any, either. You say "Sarah Vaughan" to any number off people who really don't have a clue, and they've at least heard the name. Is that really worth anything? I don't think so, but the world that does is not my world, so...nobody asks me these things. Either way, Sarah probably got a real nice piece of change for doing the gig and her people were probably able to pimp "she's featured on the new Quincy Jones album!!!" bit as leverage when needed. Business! Quote
Christiern Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 Thank you, Jim. This bland crap is an insult to the artists buried in it. Quote
JSngry Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 Yet I am sure that many checks were cashed by the insulted ones (including the ones in the fine® print), that they were all for the agreed amount per the agreed-upon terms, and that none of them bounced. Music at its not so best, but business as it should be (and isn't always). Quote
Christiern Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 If money is everything, I guess you would be right, but these were not poor folks looking for a handout from Mr. ME. JSngry: "Sarah probably got a real nice piece of change for doing the gig and her people were probably able to pimp "she's featured on the new Quincy Jones album!!!" bit as leverage when needed." To an artist of Sarah's stature, being (you call that "featured"?) on a Quincy Jones album was hardly something to brag about or impress people with. Quincy had money and a hyped up name, Quincy did not have the respect of his fellow artists—not the ones who had dedicated their lives to the music. Your comments reflect the materialistic mindset that has diluted the music business. Quote
Larry Kart Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 Yet I am sure that many checks were cashed by the insulted ones (including the ones in the fine® print), that they were all for the agreed amount per the agreed-upon terms, and that none of them bounced. Music at its not so best, but business as it should be (and isn't always). By that point in Q's career, given his power in the industry, I would think that the primary motive for those artists who participated was not money but fear -- that is, they feared that if they failed to stroke Q's ego, his likely resulting disfavor could hurt them. Eat a shit sandwich today or eat a really big shit sandwich down the road. Business as it should be? Quote
JSngry Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 My comments reflect the reality of the music business as it has existed for as long as I've known it. Whether or not I agree with that reality is pretty much reflected in the exalted status which I have neither seeked nor obtained within said industry, although I am definitely willing to forge a Benny Goodman autograph for the right price. I bet there's still a market! But seriously, if you think that as Quincy Jones' name and fame grew, that the stars who appeared on his albums did not view it as an opportunity to get their name out there a little more, even if it was already out there, then...are you serious? You think these people told their people, "Hey, I'm on the new Quincy Jones album. Whatever you do, DO NOT BREATHE A WORD OF IT TO ANYBODY or else I'll can your ass like Star-Kist"? Seriously? Yes, the music industry is corrupt, based on greed and vanity, and selling anything to anybody who will buy it. It's about industry first and music second (at best). Also in today's headlines, George Washington was elected President Of The United States. Quote
fasstrack Posted February 1, 2012 Report Posted February 1, 2012 Also in today's headlines, George Washington was elected President Of The United States. :g Quote
JSngry Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Yet I am sure that many checks were cashed by the insulted ones (including the ones in the fine® print), that they were all for the agreed amount per the agreed-upon terms, and that none of them bounced. Music at its not so best, but business as it should be (and isn't always). By that point in Q's career, given his power in the industry, I would think that the primary motive for those artists who participated was not money but fear -- that is, they feared that if they failed to stroke Q's ego, his likely resulting disfavor could hurt them. Eat a shit sandwich today or eat a really big shit sandwich down the road. Business as it should be? Geez, you're even more paranoid about Quincy Jones than Chris... Even if this is true (and I really think it's absurd to think that Chakka Khan or Sarah Vaughan or Miles Davis were afraid that Quincy Jones could RUIN THEIR CAREERS!!!!!) - this is the way any industry works, and the fact that I can't think of any industry and/or industry power where this is not the case strongly suggests that it's kind of "the nature of the beast" , those seeking power stroke those who have it, yeah, that's pretty much the way industry works, and get over it people, either play it or leave it alone, but quit whining about power doing what power do unless you're willing to confront power on its own turf and its own terms and knock them off their block, the question remains - in a world where industry and power exist as they do and do what they do how they do it, why is it so wrong that Quincy Jones became part of that industry and got some of that power? Is it because he was A Talented Person and Talented People aren't supposed to do what Power do to get what Power have? Yeah, people not Knowing Their Place and taking Power by whatever means present themselves. Of such things are Gangsters born, and if you don't have an at-least ambivalent respect for Gangsters in principle, then you're either a liar or a Volunteered Slave. People use each other for non-altruistic ends. Every damn day. If you're smart, you get something for yourself out of the deal. If you're not smart, hey - learn. If you can find a better world, let me know. Good luck. Quote
Larry Kart Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 My comments reflect the reality of the music business as it has existed for as long as I've known it. Whether or not I agree with that reality is pretty much reflected in the exalted status which I have neither seeked nor obtained within said industry, although I am definitely willing to forge a Benny Goodman autograph for the right price. I bet there's still a market! But seriously, if you think that as Quincy Jones' name and fame grew, that the stars who appeared on his albums did not view it as an opportunity to get their name out there a little more, even if it was already out there, then...are you serious? You think these people told their people, "Hey, I'm on the new Quincy Jones album. Whatever you do, DO NOT BREATHE A WORD OF IT TO ANYBODY or else I'll can your ass like Star-Kist"? Seriously? Yes, the music industry is corrupt, based on greed and vanity, and selling anything to anybody who will buy it. It's about industry first and music second (at best). Also in today's headlines, George Washington was elected President Of The United States. Jim -- When in this groove, it would seem that you could convince yourself of anything. In particular, a nothing vanity project like that Q album with Sarah, Ray Charles, et al. on it would not have been much (if at all) "an opportunity ([for them] to get their name out there a little more." Ray Charles, seriously? Their attitude toward this non-project project would most likely been one of rueful semi-indifference, a la (to up the ante a bit) "suck one cock and you're a cocksucker, so here it goes." The be-all and end-all of it business-wise was to submit to flattering Q's ego versus the consequences that failing to flatter his engorged ego might bring down upon you. Again, a not unfamiliar aspect of the business, but not the one you keep harping on. P.S. Posted this before I saw your most recent post, which grants much of what I've been saying for some time here. And, yes, I think that Q's disfavor could hurt people of considerable stature and longevity. Would you yourself, if you were Sarah at that point in her career, have taken the risk to find out? Quote
fasstrack Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) The content of this thread has taken a nose-dive. Repetitiveness, sadly,has set in like gangrene. Anyone with a different take care to jump in? Edited February 2, 2012 by fasstrack Quote
JSngry Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 (edited) The be-all and end-all of it business-wise was to submit to flattering Q's ego versus the consequences that failing to flatter his engorged ego might bring down upon you. Now see, here's where your angst about Quincy Jones gets in the way of cold reality. I seriously doubt that any of the "established" names Quivered In Fear at what might happen if they were "unavailable". Not that they Jumped For Joy either. But people don't get "there" without knowing which gigs to take, not out of fear, but just because it's Good Business to be there.The be-all and end-all of it business-wise was for everybody to get their egos stroked and their profiles heightened. Quincy got to "show respect and provide a forum" and the artists involved got to "be involved in a Quincy Jones project". Ray Charles? Why, he's just helping his old buddy out,ya' know, and oh yeah, the residuals from the Pepsi gig have run out. Chakka Kahn's been doing cameos for god knows how long, when did she last have a hit? But she's still A Name That Everybody Knows And Loves. Why? Because That Name is still out there. Miles? Hey, Miles just loved being "there" to watch (and to be watched while watching). Take 6? Hey - EVERYBODY digs Take 6, and they still need more exposure. Good for Quincy for giving to them back then, and good for them for taking it. We could go on, but the point is - at the level we're talking about, People With Power need - and want - People With Even More Power, and vice-versa. The snake swallows its tail, and never runs out of tail to swallow. Why? This, my friend, is the nature of humanity, and definitely that of The Music Industry. And I've still not had it explained to me why Quincy Jones getting all this power for itself is so much horribly worse than anybody else getting power for themselves. Edited February 2, 2012 by JSngry Quote
JSngry Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 And oh, btw - any Objective Cultural Historian who leaves the Quincy Jones records of the 1970s out of the Cultural History is just flat-out getting it wrong. I don't care what you thought or think of them, or how they did or didn't get made, that shit was there, and big time. Sorry, Jazz Fans Of Pure Spirit. Quote
fasstrack Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Ahhhrgh. It's like trying to stop a public fight between a guy and his wife. You may mean well but both will give you the evil eye and tell you to fuck off. Hope y'all solve that problem of life being unfair and the powerful clinging to power with this back-and-forth. Of course the subject's never been debated before . I'm out. Quote
JSngry Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Hope y'all solve that problem of life being unfair and the powerful clinging to power with this back-and-forth. Of course the subject's never been debated before . That's pretty much what I'm saying, albeit more verbosely. Quote
Larry Kart Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 And I've still not had it explained to me why Quincy Jones getting all this power for itself is so much horribly worse than anybody else getting power for themselves. And why can't you understand the well-attested-to fact from which all this stems -- that many of Q's peers, who certainly were far from ignorant of the ins and out of the music business, regarded the particular behavior we were talking abut originally with special disgust ... and did so at the time Q was engaging in it. Yes, perhaps it all seems rather quaint in the light of later developments in the business, but that was the Original Historical Context. Quote
Noj Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Whatever the circumstances, I really like a number of the albums under Quincy's name. I guess it's a matter of reading the liner notes and knowing who's playing what and who deserves credit for what. Quote
ValerieB Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 Pretty much, but you left out one thing: he was a black man with a look that was "acceptable" to whites. Ridiculous, but that's the way things often were, especially when the talent was short of extraordinary. he was actually quite good-looking when he was a young man. Quote
JSngry Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 And I've still not had it explained to me why Quincy Jones getting all this power for itself is so much horribly worse than anybody else getting power for themselves. And why can't you understand the well-attested-to fact from which all this stems -- that many of Q's peers, who certainly were far from ignorant of the ins and out of the music business, regarded the particular behavior we were talking abut originally with special disgust ... and did so at the time Q was engaging in it. Yes, perhaps it all seems rather quaint in the light of later developments in the business, but that was the Original Historical Context. Yeah, I get it - peers were not used to by being jacked around this much by other peers. That special privilege was reserved for The Man (whoever it might have been). And Quincy crossed the line by becoming The Man himself. I get it. What I also get is that a lot of people would just as soon not become The Man as they would do something about it. And then bitch about somebody who does. Well, make up your mind. Either you have The Man or you don't. If you do, learn how to deal. And if you don't...well, there is no you don't. But that seems to not have sunk in for some. We can bring ethnic prejudices into it, but let's not. We can bring occupational stereotypes into it, but let's not. We can bring conscious and unconscious programmed economic behavioral protocols into it, but let's not. Bottom line - if Quincy Jones would have been some street-smart no talent hustler who ganstered his way to the top and was disliked by his peers (especially the ones whoi didn't "make it" nearly as much), we'd be all "yeah, jesus, what an fucking asshole...NEXT." But when Quincy Jones - Talented Street-Smart Hustler, A Budding Artist for crissakes - does it, everybody goes all Herbert Morrison and shit, like it's some kind of SPECIAL kind of bad and wrong for THAT kind of person to do it, and anyway, he got used his looks - The Proper Negro Look, I guess... - to get over. Like it's a sin to do that. I only wish I could do that... Bullshit. Yes, I get it. Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted February 2, 2012 Author Report Posted February 2, 2012 quincy jones isnt really that handsome, i mean hes ok, but i dunno Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted February 2, 2012 Author Report Posted February 2, 2012 this shit is goin' down. im gonna post on his facebook. should i go balls out and ask him about the theft. he cant sue me, right? or should i just ask him whats up with go west man Quote
ValerieB Posted February 2, 2012 Report Posted February 2, 2012 quincy jones isnt really that handsome, i mean hes ok, but i dunno talking about when he was MUCH younger! Quote
chewy-chew-chew-bean-benitez Posted February 3, 2012 Author Report Posted February 3, 2012 lolz, even then-- i guess hes kind of like a fatter billy eckstine, but thats really going out on a limb Quote
_forumlogo.png.a607ef20a6e0c299ab2aa6443aa1f32e.png)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.